合成苏格拉底辩论：考察人格对道德决策与说服动态的影响
Synthetic Socratic Debates: Examining Persona Effects on Moral Decision and Persuasion Dynamics
AI总结：
本文通过模拟AI-AI辩论研究人格对道德决策和说服效果的影响，发现政治意识形态和性格特质对辩论结果影响最大，且随着辩论进行，论证趋于温和。
摘要：
随着大型语言模型（LLMs）越来越多地应用于具有道德敏感性的领域，了解人格特质如何影响其道德推理和说服行为变得至关重要。我们首次进行了大规模研究，探讨了AI-AI辩论中多维人格效应在现实道德困境中的影响。使用一个六维人格空间（年龄、性别、国家、阶级、意识形态和性格），我们模拟了AI代理之间围绕131个关系型案例的结构化辩论。我们的结果表明，人格影响初始的道德立场和辩论结果，其中政治意识形态和性格特质影响最强。说服成功率因特质而异，自由和开放的性格达到了更高的共识和胜率。虽然基于对数的置信度在辩论中增长，但情感和可信度相关的诉求减少，表明随着时间的推移，论证变得更加温和。这些趋势与心理学和文化研究的发现相吻合，强化了为AI道德推理建立人格意识评估框架的必要性。
英文摘要：
As large language models (LLMs) are increasingly used in morally sensitive domains, it is crucial to understand how persona traits affect their moral reasoning and persuasive behavior. We present the first large-scale study of multi-dimensional persona effects in AI-AI debates over real-world moral dilemmas. Using a 6-dimensional persona space (age, gender, country, class, ideology, and personality), we simulate structured debates between AI agents over 131 relationship-based cases. Our results show that personas affect initial moral stances and debate outcomes, with political ideology and personality traits exerting the strongest influence. Persuasive success varies across traits, with liberal and open personalities reaching higher consensus and win rates. While logit-based confidence grows during debates, emotional and credibility-based appeals diminish, indicating more tempered argumentation over time. These trends mirror findings from psychology and cultural studies, reinforcing the need for persona-aware evaluation frameworks for AI moral reasoning.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
